phd writing papers

How I write papers

There is plenty of advice out there on how to write academic publications, from general stylistic tips to field-specific guides. Yet, I’ve found most of that advice tends to be abstract, or focused on the final product, never giving you a step-by-step account of the process. In this post, I share the writing process I find myself using after 70+ academic publications. This will give you an idea of where to start writing your paper (especially if you have never written one), and it will show you that all polished papers have humble (even crappy) origins. Kill perfectionism, and the dreaded “academic writer’s block” will eventually disappear.

In a previous post , I went over several reasons why I think scientific writing is difficult for many doctoral students: the lack of specific training, the focus on the finished product (vs. how to get there), the fact that it is a collaborative process, or that many of us don’t use our mother tongue when we write. As a way to counter many of those, I thought it could be useful to share what my own writing process is 1 , which I have come to after more than 10 years of trying (and quite a few “loaves of bread sold” 2 ). This process assumes that you are collaborating with others, in that it defines when and what to send to co-authors and other collaborators. This is also the process that we recommend in the “writing seminar” I have helped teach at our university.

This may result in a post longer than usual, so… For those of you that want to get to the point right away and run off:

My paper writing process

For those of us that need a bit more explanation, read on below. I will try to illustrate each step with an example from a recent paper I co-authored (still under review) 3 . You will see how different the finished product is, compared with its humble origins:

Step 1. Define the main idea

Once you decide you want to write a paper, start with a blank piece of paper (e.g., a post-it), or a new document in your computer. Do not start from the full report of your study 4 , or other random pieces of text you may have written during your research about the topic. Blank paper. OK, now, just try to answer in one sentence : What is the paper about? What is the main research contribution 5 you are trying to make here? or, in other words, what is the “reusable knowledge” that you think other researchers need to know, and could build upon? Write that one sentence down. That’s it 6

• Diving into my archives I found the earliest “main idea” I had about this recently-published paper of mine: “Active or passive [data] gathering? Design-based research studies on technological support for evidence-based teacher reflection” . As you can see, this initial idea had quite a few problems (for starters, it was two sentences, not one! plus, what is the new knowledge I wanted to convey is not very clear either). It looks nothing like the final title of the paper. However, it tried to convey that it was about certain studies we had done, and that active/passive data gathering seemed to play an important role in what we discovered. That will have to do for now. Let’s move on.

Step 2. Define the audience

This one is probably the first point where my advice may deviate from other advice out there. Scientific writing (or any writing, really) is basically an act of communication. And, by definition, it requires a sender (you), a message (see point #1), and a receiver . You have to have one. Pitching a contribution to the wrong audience is one of the most common causes of rejection for scientific papers, so… don’t make this mistake. Define who will be interested in the main idea of the paper, who cares about this kind of thing you’re proposing. If it’s your first paper, you may not be sure, and that’s OK. But there are things you can do to find out, like a) asking your advisor or more experienced colleagues; b) looking at similar papers you have read: which conferences or journals are they published in? Narrow it down to 1-3 concrete options of journals/conferences. Write them down. Look at the venue’s author and submission guidelines. The good thing about setting this from the outset is that now you have already indications of the expected length of the piece, its tone, level of specificity, things the readers probably know already, etc.

• I initially set my paper to be sent to the British Journal of Educational Technology (BJET). The main reasons for this decision were that it was a journal in the field of educational technology, and a really inter-disciplinary one (our paper was neither very technical nor very educational), that it is quite high-quality and high-impact, and that they make a point of publishing research that also has relevance for teachers (which I think our paper idea had) 7 .

Step 3: Define the team

Once you know what you write about and for whom, you can decide who can help you in doing it. In most fields, you do not do your research alone, but collaborating with others (but in some fields it may be required that you write some papers alone – check with your advisors). This additional team members can be your advisor(s), some colleague who helped you with the data gathering or data analysis 8 … but think wider. Is there somebody else you know (in your department, or elsewhere) who knows a lot about the literature on topic X that your paper addresses? or data analysis technique Y? That could save you some time, and this person could bring in new, interesting ideas to the paper.

Then, send your idea and target venue to potential co-authors : this can be a short email, a chat over coffee… The main point is to pitch them the idea, see what they think and whether they are interested. In this process, it is good that you set expectations about what their role will be, how much time you think this will take them, what can be the expected author order, etc. All of those can change during the writing process (depending on how the different people behave), but it is good to have some baseline expectation. From this conversation, you can already get some valuable information to help you refine the core idea (maybe they think this is not about keyword X, but rather keyword Y, or they suggest some other venue for publication, or analyses that you had not run yet).

• In my paper’s case, I simply told my boss back then, that I was thinking of writing this paper for this venue (he agreed). I also contacted the professional development specialist who had helped co-design the tool we were proposing, and helped manage the data gathering in the school. Later on during the process, I also contacted one of my PhD students, since her topic was closely related to that of the paper – and she was doing a lot of reading on some of the related literature we needed to cover anyway.

Step 4: Write a pseudo-abstract

Now that you have an idea of something scientific to write about, some scholars you want to tell it to, and some people we want to write it with, let’s flesh out the idea a little bit more. Not a lot. Just a little bit. I call this step “pseudo-abstract”, because it more or less has all the elements that a good abstract should have… only it is not really an abstract (i.e., one paragraph of nice text) yet. It is basically a series of bullet points with simple, clear messages, in three parts 9 : a) what is known about the topic of the paper (1-3 bullets); b) what this paper adds to such current knowledge, i.e., what contribution(s) it brings (1-2 bullets); and c) what are the implications of this contribution for other researchers, or practitioners, policy-makers or the society at large (1-3 bullets). Keep the bullets as complete sentences, but simple ones (e.g., not more than 100 characters). You can also think about this step as the “grandmother’s version of your scientific contribution” (i.e., how you would communicate this contribution to a non-expert) – remember, most of our grandmothers are not biochemists or sociology researchers!

• Below, you can see a pseudo-abstract for the same paper, which I did some months later than the original “main idea”. You can see that the title there has already changed (but still looks pretty generic), and some more ideas have been added, especially regarding what is known about the topic (i.e., what would be the main take-away message from the literature about the relevant keywords, like “teacher reflection”), and what are the implications (in this case, how a teacher or a school leader could use the tools/ideas we present in the paper).

Example pseudo-abstract from a real paper

Step 5: Create a weighted outline

Now that you have fleshed out the basic idea, let’s start thinking about how we are going to write it. A first step in this is to do an outline of the sections of the paper, as you would find it in a table of contents of a book: sections, subsections, sub-subsections… And, since we already know where we want to send it, we know how long the paper should be (in pages, or words), so we can assign estimated lengths to every section and subsection 10 . Why do this weighted outline? First, it makes us reflect about the relative importance of the different parts of the text (i.e.: more important parts –like the paper’s main contribution– should be described in more detail, and hence should be longer). Secondly, and since for many people writing is a bit painful, we do not want to write 30 pages of text on a topic, only to find out that we only needed three pages (so, we have to throw away 90% of that hard-worked text). Furthermore, downsizing text is just plain difficult: once you got used to saying things at a certain level of detail, it has some kind of “anchoring effect” that makes it very difficult to change our frame of mind (i.e., we think that all we said there is really important to be said). In a sense, making this weighted outline tries to put the anchoring on your side so that you will keep the paper close to the length you actually need.

Once you have the main idea (which can be the working title), the co-authors, the target venue, the pseudo-abstract and the weighted outline, it is a good moment to send all this to the co-authors for feedback. This should be a one-page document, so it is more likely that even busy people can give you quickly some ideas about the general direction, section titles and relevant keywords, etc. Once you get this feedback and make the necessary corrections, you can also polish this into an actual title, abstract and outline with lengths, which you can send to the editor of your target journal(s), to inquire whether they think this kind of paper fits the scope of the journal – and their opinion actually matters a lot, since they are the first filter even before your paper reaches the reviewers! Although they are not obliged to answer, they will often be nice enough to tell you (since by responding, they will get either a good paper, or less out-of-scope papers, later on).

• You can take a look at the weighted outline from my example paper here , which I wrote still aiming at the BJET journal, which had a maximum length of 6,000 words. One thing you can notice is that some of the subsections end up being very short (100 words?), which should have made me think that something was not totally right (one-paragraph sections are rare!). Also, the total length was well over 80% of the hard limit (since you also have to count abstract and the other front matter in those 6,000 words). As you will see, these clues became quite important later on…

More steps… after the break

Wow, this post is getting a bit long! Since we have now reached the middle point within the process, and it was a lot to absorb, I think we can make a break here, until next week. Then, we will go into the details of the paper. As they say, the devil is always in the details but, once the groundwork of these first five steps is there, and you have already gotten feedback from your co-authors a couple of times, you can have some confidence that your shot (and the effort that each step takes) cannot go too far off the mark.

In the meantime, why don’t you give these five steps a try? Do you have an idea for a paper about some research you did, but you don’t know where to start? Try this and let me know how it went, in the comments below!

The emphasis on “my own” is important. Writing is still mostly an art (yes, even scientific writing), a very complex skill that requires many smaller skills and abilities, which not all of us can tap in the same way. As they say, “your mileage may vary”. Even I don’t always follow this process every single time (e.g., if I’m pressed for time, I might jump a step here and there). This process is just what most of my writing processes resemble, especially if I have some kind of control about the paper (e.g., if I am the first author). ↩︎

If you don’t get the reference, go read the previous post . It has cute baker drawings! ↩︎

Prieto, L. P., Magnuson, P., Dillenbourg, P., & Saar, M. (2017). Reflection for action: Designing tools to support teacher reflection on everyday evidence. Preprint Available at https://osf.io/bj2rp . ↩︎

See a later post for why you should have a full, detailed research report vs. writing up your papers directly from the research. Suffice to say that the report is where you describe your full process and results, which are of interest to you and your team. A paper is a wholly different thing, and the audience is normally interested in a small subset of that only. ↩︎

The topic of what constitutes a valid research contribution is a complex and thorny one, since it varies a lot depending on your research field. In general, it seems that most fields require that a contribution is a piece of reusable knowledge (i.e., you can convey it to others and they can reproduce it and build upon it), which is relevant to a certain scientific community (e.g., astrophysicists, engineers, linguists, whatever your field is), which is novel (i.e., new and non-obvious), and has some kind of usefulness (but this one varies a lot from applied to more basic/theoretical fields). Furthermore, you have to provide some evidence that all of the above is true (be it with mathematical proofs, data from empirical studies, or whatever method your field considers valid). In the end, the goal of the paper and its different parts is basically to prove your point on all these regards! ↩︎

Pro tip: instead of writing the one idea in a piece of paper, try writing three different main ideas in three post-its, and then choose the best one (or pitch them to a colleague). You can even go further and try what in design circles is called “crazy 8s” (i.e., eight different ideas for the main contribution, in 8 minutes). Try to make each idea meaningful, different from the previous ones, but don’t worry if they end up being crap. That is the whole point of the exercise. For empirical proof that this seems to help both the quality of the outputs and your own feeling of self-efficacy, see, for example, Dow, S. P., Glassco, A., Kass, J., Schwarz, M., Schwartz, D. L., & Klemmer, S. R. (2010). Parallel prototyping leads to better design results, more divergence, and increased self-efficacy. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) , 17 (4), 18. ↩︎

Interestingly, this is not the journal where we have the paper now under review. In case you’re curious, the main reason for the eventual change was that our draft ended up being much longer than what the journal allowed. This was in part due to my lack of discipline when writing, and the fact that we chose to tell our contribution in a way that could not really be made much shorter. Even when we changed our target journal to another one more adequate to the manuscript length, but with similar characteristics to BJET, our paper was rejected (i.e., the reviewers did not appreciate the contribution enough). Thus, we had to improve the paper based on some of the reviewer feedback and find yet another journal to submit it to – where it is now under review. In retrospect, I’d say that this last journal was probably the best choice anyway (it’s just that we did not even know about this journal at the outset when the paper started). This is worth taking into account: no plan survives contact with reality – but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have one. ↩︎

Who should count as co-author in your papers? This is another topic for an entire post, but for now: anybody that made substantial contributions to the design, data gathering, analysis or interpretation of the evidence; AND helps you drafting or revising the paper; AND checks out the final version for publishing; AND agrees to be responsible for its contents. You can check out things like the Vancouver Convention , or this very complete site from the Norwegian Research Ethics Committee . ↩︎

This kind of structure is used in many journals, under the name “highlights” or “practitioner notes”. Basically, they are aimed at summarizing the paper in a nutshell, in relatively simple language, so that other scientists and people that are not necessarily experts in your field, can understand them… which is precisely what we want to do at this point! ↩︎

Pro tip: journals and conferences normally offer a hard maximum length limit… don’t target that number! make it about 80% of the length limit, or even less if you think the contribution should be shorter. You will probably go over your target length anyways during the writing of actual text – and shortening text is both painful and difficult. ↩︎

• Communication

Luis P. Prieto

Luis P. is a Ramón y Cajal research fellow at the University of Valladolid (Spain), investigating learning technologies, especially learning analytics. He is also an avid learner about doctoral education and supervision, and he's the main author at the A Happy PhD blog.

Google Scholar profile

• Communications
• Computer Science
• Criminal Justice
• Environmental Management
• Forensic Psychology
• Healthcare Admin
• Human Resources
• Project Management
• Social work
• Special Education
• Sports Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Adult Education
• Business Intelligence
• Early Childhood Education
• Educational Technology
• Homeland Security
• Information Systems Security
• Information Technology
• International Business
• Management Information Systems
• Nonprofit Management
• School Counseling
• Academic Publishing Guide
• Building a Graduate School Resume or CV
• Choosing Between a Thesis or Non-thesis Master's Degree
• Expert Guide to Studying Abroad
• FAQ: Online Master's Degrees
• Grad School Guide Book
• Graduate School for Students with Disabilities
• Green Graduate Degrees
• How to Be a Successful Grad Student
• How to Choose the Right Graduate Program
• How to Get a Master's Degree in an Unrelated Field
• How to Transfer College Credits in Grad School
• How to Write a Winning Personal Statement
• Inside Graduate Admissions
• Ivy League Grad Schools
• Master's Degrees for Veterans
• Master's Degree for Women
• Mental Health in Grad School
• Progressive LGBTQ Graduate Degrees
• Should You Apply for a Graduate School Assistantship?
• Surviving Grad School with a Family
• Taking a Gap Year Before Grad School
• Women in STEM Graduate Resources
• Writing a Successful Statement of Purpose
• Alternative Ways to Pay for School
• The Best Part-Time Jobs During Grad School
• Company Funded Graduate School
• FAFSA For Grad Students
• Financial Aid Resources
• Graduate Student Loans
• Paying for Your Master's Degree
• Paying Off Student Loans
• Paying for Your PhD
• Fellowship Opportunities
• LGBTQ Scholarships
• MBA Scholarships
• Scholarship Resources
• Scholarships for Veterans
• Scholarships for Women
• Crushing the GRE Guidebook
• GMAT Guidebook
• Guide to the LSAT
• MCAT Prep for Medical School
• Study Guide: Exam Resources
• TOEFL Prep for Non-Native English Speakers
•       Resources       Publish or Perish: Graduate Students' Guide to Publishing

Publish or Perish: Graduate Students' Guide to Publishing

In addition to endless piles of reading, demanding expectations in the classroom, student teaching responsibilities, and the always-looming awareness that they need to research, write, and edit a high-quality dissertation before graduating, today’s Ph.D. students also commonly feel stress about another topic: publishing. As more prospective employers expect degree seekers to get their names in academic journals and conferences while still in school, many learners feel overwhelmed by the prospects of making the grade. The following guide answers some of their most pressing questions, provides guidance on the ins and outs of publishing while still in school, and offers expert advice from a professor who knows better than most what it takes to publish rather than perish.

Understanding Publishing in Graduate School

Getting published as a grad student can feel overwhelming at first, because there’s so much to learn about the process and expectations surrounding it. With a bit of research, however, students can familiarize themselves with the specific language surrounding publishing and make in-roads towards getting their first paper published.

What Does it Mean to Get Published?

Within the context of graduate school, publishing refers to getting essays, papers, and research findings published in one of the academic journals or related forms seen as a leader in the field. As jobs in academia continue to become more competitive, it isn’t enough for learners to simply do well in their coursework. The degree seeker who hopes to land an important post-doctoral fellowship or find a teaching position at a college or university must make themselves stand out in other ways.

When Should a Ph.D. Candidate Get Published?

Getting a paper published takes a lot of time and effort, and those students who wait until the final year or two of a doctoral program may fail to actually have any published materials by the time they graduate. According to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Graduate Connections program , getting a paper published – especially if it’s your first – can take up to three years. In addition to the fact that most journals publish quarterly, the panel review process typically takes a significant amount of time and those submitting for the first or second time usually need to make a large number of edits and complete rewrites in order to reach a publishable standard.

How to Get Published

In order to get published, students submit their work to the journal or conference of their choosing. They frequently also provide a cover letter outlining their research interests. Most journals put out generic calls for submissions once or twice a year, while some may ask for papers addressing specific topics that have a much shorter turnaround time. Grad students may find it intimidating to go up against more seasoned academics, but another option revolves around partnering with their dissertation supervisor or another professor with whom they work closely with to co-author a paper. This not only helps ensure the validity of their findings, but alerts the academic world know that this other, more recognized faculty member believes in the research the student is doing.

Who Should Get Published?

Learners most anxious to get published are those who see their future careers in teaching and research. Because the world of academia is relatively small when divided into individual subjects, it’s important for students who want to break into these ambitious arenas to make a name for themselves early on and create a curriculum vitae that captures the attention of hiring committees.

Where Should Students Get Published?

When deciding which publications to pursue, students should consider the research aims of each and their likelihood of getting published. Newer journals tend to take more submissions as they are still working on building up their roster of contributors. While less venerated than other publications, getting printed in these can help build up name recognition and make it easier to break into the top-tier publications over time.

In terms of where work is published, the majority of students look to academic journals when sending out cover letters and examples of their work. But other options exist as well. Presenting papers at conferences is a popular avenue, as are chapters in books. The following sections takes a more in-depth look at how and where to publish.

Realities & Challenges of Getting Published

Getting published, especially while still in grad school, takes tenacity, focus, and a thick skin. Those who continue working on their craft, presenting at conferences, collaborating with others, and not taking no for an answer, however, frequently find success. Some of the challenges students may encounter include:

Lack of time

It’s no secret that doctoral students have busy schedules that seldom allow for outside – or sometimes, even related – interests to take up much of their days. Because publishing is not a degree requirement, carving out the time needed to research, write, and edit the type of paper required for publishing can feel impossible. With this in mind, student should look for ways to multitask. If presenting at a conference, think about how that paper could be transformed into a journal article.

Lack of confidence

Studies have shown that mental stress and illness frequently increase in grad school as students feel intense pressure to stand out from their peers. These feelings are often intensified when considering publishing, as learners are going up against academics and researchers who have been working in the field far longer than them. It’s important to remember that each of those renowned individuals had to start somewhere.

Lack of funding

Completing the research needed for a competitive paper doesn’t only take time – it requires money. Whether traveling to archives or printing all the necessary documentation, funding for outside research can be scarce while in school. Some programs provide competitive grants for research travel to help offset these costs.

Intense competition

As discussed earlier, competition for publishing is fierce. Academic journals and conferences only have space for so many authors and trying to get noticed can feel like a losing battle. In addition to seeking out newer publications and co-authoring with more notable figures, consider taking part in symposiums at the school you attend to get your foot in the door. While research on the average number of rejections is lacking, don’t feel discouraged if it takes a long time to be chosen for publication.

Finding the right publisher

While getting your name in print within an academic journal you greatly admire is the ultimate goal, it may take some years for it to come to fruition. One of the biggest mistakes students make is applying to ill-suited publications. Look for journals with editorial board members whose names you recognize. If a professor knows one of them, don’t be afraid to ask if they can help get your paper in front of them.

Adequately addressing feedback

Getting a paper published often requires intense editing and even completely restructuring and rewriting what you conceived in the initial abstract. If an academic journal shows interest in your essay but suggests rewrites, pay close attention to their requests and try to work with an advisor to ensure you meet all the stated requirements.

What do Graduate Students Publish?

Academic journals may receive the lion’s share of discussion in the publishing world, but graduate students can actually choose from numerous outlets and paths for getting their work to a larger audience. Students should review the options listed below and think about which format might showcase their work best.

Tips for Publishing

Despite the great amount of work required to publish, students who meet the challenges and persevere stand to position themselves favorably for future job opportunities. The following section addresses some of the most common questions about the process and alleviates general fears about how publishing (or not) reflects upon them.

How many papers should a Ph.D. student try to publish before graduating?

According to scholar-practitioner Dr. Deniece Dortch, no single answer exists. “There is no hard and fast rule as to the number of publications students should have prior to graduation,” she notes. “The reality is students in STEM disciplines and those who use quantitative methods are more likely to have publications prior to graduation because they often work in research teams and labs. This is not to say that qualitative scholars or those in other disciplines aren’t, but it’s a much more standardized practice in STEM for students to graduate with two or three publications. Personally, I had one sole-authored publication accepted prior to graduation, one first-authored piece, and one second-authored piece.”

How many journal articles is it possible to publish during a PhD?

“The answer varies and is determined by factors such as length of program, research team access, and faculty relationships,” says Dr. Dortch. “I’ve seen folks finish with as many as 10 publications, although this is extreme and doesn’t happen often.” She continues, “Imagine you are in a four-year program and you get your idea to write an article in year two. You submit that article in year three after getting approval, collecting data, analyzing it, and then writing your paper. Year three you submit that paper; it may be accepted in year four after months of revisions at the request of the editor. You finally have one published paper as you graduate.”

Are there PhD students who have no journal publications? Should they be worried about that?

“It depends on the type of employment the student is seeking upon graduation,” says Dr. Dortch, “Students applying to or wanting to work in institutions and organizations with the highest levels of research productivity who have no publications may want to consider post-doctoral positions so they have the time and space to work on increasing their publication record after graduation.” She continues, “Postdocs are a very common practice in many disciplines and are used as a way to gain additional training and expertise in research and teaching.”

Is it absolutely essential to have publications to apply for a PhD program?

In a word, no. Individuals working toward doctoral degrees have many reasons for doing so, not all of which require them to publish. Admissions panels also recognize that students focus their efforts on many different goals (e.g. jobs, internships, presenting at symposiums) throughout bachelor’s and master’s programs. As long as learners can demonstrate an ongoing commitment to scholarship, publishing is not an absolute requirement.

Does publish or perish begin before starting a PhD program?

It’s true that many students begin worrying about publishing before starting a Ph.D. program, but the reality is that they have ample time during and after completing a doctorate to make their mark on the world of scholarship. According to a recent article by Inside Higher Ed , some individuals in the academy now wonder if too much emphasis is being placed on grad students publishing. Learners unsure about this should speak to a trusted advisor or mentor to figure out when to focus on getting published.

What is the difference between a published article and a Ph.D. thesis?

While a Ph.D. thesis is required for satisfactory completion of a degree, a published article is not. A Ph.D. also takes a much longer form than a published article, averaging approximately 90,000 words. Academic journal entries, conversely, are usually between 4,000 and 7,000 words.

Should I first write my Ph.D. thesis or publish journal articles?

Though publishing at the doctoral level is increasingly seen as a requirement in the job market, it is not part of degree requirements. With this in mind, students should prioritize the research and writing of their thesis above all else. If they have the time and mental clarity needed to publish journal articles, this can be a secondary focus.

From the Expert

Dr. Deniece Dortch is a scholar-practitioner known for her commitment to diversity, social justice and activism. Dr. Dortch holds a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership & Policy Analysis from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, an Ed.M. in Higher & Postsecondary Education from Columbia University, an M.A. in Intercultural Service, Diversity Leadership & Management from the School for International Training and a B.A. in Spanish from Eastern Michigan University. Hailed a graduate school expert by NPR, she has published numerous articles on the experiences of historically underrepresented undergraduate and graduate students. She is the creator of the African American Doctoral Scholars Initiative at the University of Utah and currently a Visiting Assistant Professor of Higher Education at The George Washington University .

Publishing as a student can feel intimidating. Why is this process important for learners to go through?

Long gone are the days of getting a good job by just having a solid dissertation or an award-winning thesis. Publishing your work while in school demonstrates a commitment to answering and understanding our world’s most complex problems. Further, institutions want to know that you have the capacity to publish. Now, publishing doesn’t mean you have to be first author or that you must publish sole-authored pieces only. Collaboration is also sufficient and often encouraged. The publishing process is intimidating for folks because it involves critique and, most often, rejection.

Receiving and giving critical feedback is part of the learning process and students should not shy away from it because it will only serve them well in the end as they learn to cope with disappointment and reward. But more importantly, there is no point spending months and years conducting research if you are just going to keep your findings to yourself. What you learn is meant to be shared.

What are some common mistakes these learners make when preparing their first papers?

Common mistakes that individuals make include not adhering to the guidelines outlined in the submission process. Examples of this can include ignoring formatting requirements (e.g. APA, MLA, etc.), going over the stated word count, inadequately proofreading, and not submitting a cover letter. This is probably the most important one.

What specific advice do you have for them in terms of finding the right outlet, preparing their work, and submitting to journals?

Students should have multiple individuals read over their work before submission. Writing is a process and even after it is submitted, it will need to be revised many more times before you will read it in print. It is part of the process. To find a good outlet for your work, pay attention to where other scholars are submitting their work. If you’re subject is aligned with theirs, you have a shot. Make a list of at least three outlets that fit your article. Also look out for special calls. A special call for submissions usually goes a lot faster than the regular submission process, so if you’re a student who is about to go on the job market, submit to those first. Also, the more competitive the academic, the longer the process, so keep that in mind. If you are rejected, just re-submit to the the next journal on your list.

In addition to publishing in journals, how else might a student go about getting recognition in their field while still in school?

Apply for all fellowships, grants, and awards that are specific to you and what you do. People in the academy love an award winner and they especially love people whose work has been recognized and/or funded by outside groups. A great way to increase a student’s visibility is to publish outside academic journals and publish in other media outlets. Also attend conferences in your field. Try to get on the program as a presenter or facilitator so that people in your field will start to know who you are and your research interests.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue Online Writing Lab

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Online Writing Lab at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue. Students, members of the community, and users worldwide will find information to assist with many writing projects. Teachers and trainers may use this material for in-class and out-of-class instruction.

The Purdue On-Campus Writing Lab and Purdue Online Writing Lab assist clients in their development as writers—no matter what their skill level—with on-campus consultations, online participation, and community engagement. The Purdue Writing Lab serves the Purdue, West Lafayette, campus and coordinates with local literacy initiatives. The Purdue OWL offers global support through online reference materials and services.

A Message From the Assistant Director of Content Development 

The Purdue OWL® is committed to supporting  students, instructors, and writers by offering a wide range of resources that are developed and revised with them in mind. To do this, the OWL team is always exploring possibilties for a better design, allowing accessibility and user experience to guide our process. As the OWL undergoes some changes, we welcome your feedback and suggestions by email at any time.

Please don't hesitate to contact us via our contact page  if you have any questions or comments.

All the best,

Social Media

Facebook twitter.

‘Creative writing can be as impactful as an academic paper’

Grassroots initiatives can promote visibility of marginalised groups, self-expression and community, writes Emily Downes. Here are her key tips from running a creative writing competition to mark LGBTQ+ History Month

Emily Downes

• More on this topic

You may also like

Popular resources

.css-1txxx8u{overflow:hidden;max-height:81px;text-indent:0px;} How to develop a researcher mindset as a PhD student

Formative, summative or diagnostic assessment a guide, emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn, how to assess and enhance students’ ai literacy, how hard can it be testing ai detection tools.

Last year marked two decades since the repeal of Section 28, a UK law that prohibited what was described as “the promotion of homosexuality” by local authorities. What this meant, in practice, was that generations of LGBTQ+ children grew up with no safe access to information about LGBTQ+ issues, no role models, no representation. They had no indication, in fact, that they could have a successful life that included employment, acceptance and community. 

Surely, as hubs of knowledge production, higher education institutions have a social and ethical responsibility to actively repair some of the damage wrought by this law. As LGBTQ+ staff in the sector continue to report  discrimination and erasure , are we providing enough opportunities for our students to see their own lived experiences roadmapped and reflected? 

• Pride in HE: how to create an inclusive community online
• I’d tell my younger self that my chequered past would be my strength
• Making LGBTQ+ individuals feel safe, valued and empowered on campus

While institutional support and backing are essential in amplifying LGBTQ+ representation and visibility, staff on the ground can also make an impact through grassroots initiatives. And where better to push back against the fearmongering of Section 28 than from a place of love? For author, theorist and educator  bell hooks , all key social justice movements have promoted a love ethic: a practice that seeks to use knowledge, responsibility, care, trust, respect and commitment. How might that look in your professional context? 

In mine, I have had the privilege of coordinating a creative writing competition for LGBT+ History Month . Here’s some of what I learned.

Knowledge and responsibility

It’s natural to feel powerless against discrimination. However, take heart – there’s no one defining form of activism. You may not feel you have the capacity or physical ability to protest in the streets or the wherewithal for a strategic campaign. That doesn’t mean you have nothing to contribute to the cause of a more inclusive landscape in higher education. We each have our own offering of knowledge, skills and interests to share. These needn’t exclusively be academic pursuits.

What brings you joy? Perhaps it’s a gentle walk in nature or listening to a podcast or crocheting. I’m partial to all three…and I also enjoy using writing to make sense of my inner and outer worlds. A couple of years ago, I started facilitating LGBTQ+ creative writing for well-being sessions in my local community. Last year the chair of our university LGBTQ+ focus group asked if I would use this experience to make our campus more inclusive. We agreed that I would deliver a drop-in session exploring the importance of queer representation , and that I would coordinate a creative writing competition around the same theme. As a “late bloomer” bisexual who grew up with a dearth of positive representation, I felt a responsibility to be visible in our university community. I had first-hand experience of the possibilities that creative writing affords for healing and growth. I am also well aware of how stifling and impenetrable academic writing can feel for many. I saw the creative writing competition as an opportunity to put self-expression firmly back into the hands of a marginalised community. 

Care and trust

Over the past two academic years, I have gained important insights into developing the competition process with care and establishing trust with our participants. Working with students with protected characteristics means a vital aspect of care is gaining consent at multiple stages. For trans students , for example, being named in certain contexts could have immediate and severe material consequences. One student sought me out during graduation week last year to ensure they would be  dead-named – otherwise, they said, they wouldn’t be able to return home with their parents after the ceremony. 

This has fed into my experience with the competition. Just because someone has entered doesn’t mean they will feel willing or able to be named in a university update or read their piece at a public event. However much you think you’ve tied up loose ends, please double-check. It’s better to be mildly irritating with an abundance of care.

That said, please don’t let the need for caution be off-putting. Demonstrating this level of care is foundational to developing trust. Repeatedly checking in with participants about how they are represented also helps to build a sense of agency they may not always feel they have in wider society. Liaise with those in your initiative whenever a new context arises in which they may be named. 

Respect and commitment

University community members who participate in our writing competition are occupying a  brave space , and this demands our respect. We value our staff and students’ intersectional identities and recognise how vulnerable it can feel sharing those parts of yourself in your place of work or study. I have shared some of my own LGBTQ+ journey during the drop-in sessions. Another sign of respect has been the active and enthusiastic engagement from our executive director of communications and development, who has sat on the judging panel both years. Having buy-in from senior management is indescribably validating not just for our entrants but for the wider LGBTQ+ community at the university.

Commitment to such an initiative can take many forms, the most essential of which are reflection and learning. For example, our inaugural winner, Allison Rosewood, submitted a non-fiction piece about becoming the trans role model she had always sought herself. We platformed her work at the university Pride event – she was unable to speak in person, so we recorded her reading her work and played it during the Pride Literary Hour. We invited Allison to sit on the 2024 judging panel, and the award has been named the Allison Rosewood LGBTQ+ History Month award. Now, our winner will always be invited to read at Pride and to sit on the panel. Allowing the project to evolve has helped create space for students to have their experiences and identities validated, and to build an archive of visible role models. 

This year, our prompt invited entrants to imagine a world where Section 28 had never existed. Mac McClelland’s winning entry,  Brianna , is staggering. The piece eloquently draws a line from past to present, highlighting just how far-reaching and damaging legislation in this vein can be. Opening the door for this creative expression has resulted in something that, in my opinion, is as impactful as an academic paper. 

Knowledge, responsibility, care, trust, respect and commitment, then…what’s coming to mind for you? Perhaps you owe it to yourself and your community to explore your own initiative. One caveat to this: please also apply a love ethic to yourself. Does the thought of a project like this make you weary? You may be running low on reserves, especially as we so often expect members of marginalised communities to advocate and enact positive change themselves. Someone else can take up this mantle, and that’s fine, too. 

The legacy of Section 28 is a traumatised, under-represented LGBTQ+ community and a wider UK society that still often struggles to accept those living outside a heteronormative, cisnormative version of reality. But if you do have the energy and resources, projects like ours can be transformative for individuals and institutions. As bell hooks wrote: “When we are taught that safety always lies with sameness, then difference, of any kind, will appear as a threat…The choice to love is a choice to connect – to find ourselves in the other.” Let’s work to make our institutions a place of connection and relish all the richness of experience that entails. 

Emily Downes is senior student success tutor (academic writing) and LGBTQ+ Focus Group co-chair at Teesside University.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week,  sign up for the Campus newsletter .

How to develop a researcher mindset as a PhD student

A diy guide to starting your own journal, contextual learning: linking learning to the real world, what does a university faculty senate do, hybrid learning through podcasts: a practical approach, how exactly does research get funded.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

Jump to navigation

Lonergan on the Edge Graduate Student Conference 2024

Lonergan, Human Dignity & Culture - Lonergan on the Edge Graduate Student Conference 2024

at Marquette University, held Friday September 13th and Saturday September 14th, 2024 in Milwaukee, WI

Call for Papers:

Amid the so-called "culture wars" of politics, post-colonialism, globalization, multiculturalism, dehumanization, and the ideological debates at all levels of society, what can Lonergan's philosophy and theology contribute to these cultural clashes? For this year's Lonergan on the Edge Graduate Student Conference, we invite abstracts of no more than 500 words that explore the topics of culture and human dignity in Lonergan's theology, philosophy, and economics.

Submit your MS Word or PDF proposal as a one-page, double-spaced abstract prepared for blind review (i.e. no name on the proposal itself). Only one submission per student will be accepted. Regular paper presentations will be 30 minutes: 20 for presentation, 10 for Q&A.

Special consideration will be given to proposals that address this year's theme, though other proposals in Lonergan studies will also be considered.

Submission deadline: 31 July 2024

Please submit your proposed abstract to  [email protected]

Accepted proposals will be notified in early August.

All are welcome to attend, but we request proposals from current or recent (within the last five years) graduate students who have not yet received a Ph.D. We are also accepting panel proposals from groups of 2-3 students. If considering a panel, please indicate the panel theme and submit proposals together, following the blind review guidelines.

Biostatistics Graduate Program

Julia thome is first author of public health reports paper.

Posted by duthip1 on Wednesday, May 29, 2024 in News .

Congratulations to PhD candidate Julia Thome on the publication of Reporting of Child Maltreatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Southern State in the United States in  Public Health Reports last week, online ahead of print. The paper was co-authored by associate professor Rameela Raman and colleagues at the Vanderbilt Center of Excellence for Children in State Custody, which is within the Vanderbilt Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences. Thome, Raman, and the other members of this team studied how COVID-19 stay-at-home orders may have affected trends in child maltreatment allegations across different socioeconomic groups.

Tags: child abuse , child maltreatment , child neglect , COVID-19 , hotline calls , publications

Leave a Response

You must be logged in to post a comment

How well can ChatGPT-4 write APA-style psychology papers?

I n a recent study published in Contemporary School Psychology , researchers have put the latest AI technology to the test in academic writing, revealing both its potential and limitations.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been making waves in various fields, and academia is no exception. Tools powered by AI such as Grammarly and Turnitin have become staples for students and researchers, helping to refine writing by checking for grammar and ensuring originality of written work, respectively. However the capabilities of these tools, particularly in autonomously generating coherent, reliable, and scientifically accurate content, remain under scrutiny.

Led by Adam B Lockwood and Joshua Castleberry from Kent State University, the study aimed to evaluate Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4), a popular advanced AI language model developed by OpenAI, in writing American Psychological Association (APA)-style psychology papers.

While recent advancements in technology have enabled these sophisticated language models to produce what resembles human-written information, the researchers were curious to assess performance of GPT-4 in three areas: substantiation of claims, factual accuracy, and referencing.

Lockwood and Castleberry entered the following prompt into GPT-4, “Write a 2500-word manuscript on the ethical dilemmas of using ChatGPT to write for psychological and educational reports. Address how APA and NASP guidelines, as well as HIPAA and FERPA laws pertain to these ethical dilemmas. Provide recommendations for overcoming these limitations. Provide citations and references in APA formatting.”

GPT-4 provided a 1814-word document, but after removal of the title, abstract, keywords, headings, and references, a 1043-word paper remained which comprised 45 sentences.

Out of 42 sentences should have been supported by an in-text citation, only 17 (40.5%) were correctly substantiated. The remaining 25 sentences did not have a citation (40%), possessed a citation that did not exist (40%), or were supported by a citation that was irrelevant to the claim being made in the paper (20%).

To check scientific accuracy of the 25 unsubstantiated claims, the researchers were fully able to confirm the accuracy of 14 using other sources, and partially confirm accuracy of 3 more sentences (i.e. the other sources did not explicitly state the claim, but it could be inferred). Thus in total, 31 (73.8%) of sentences were verified.

Finally, 16 references were provided at the end of the paper – 12 referenced real websites; errors were found on 5 of these (1 listed incorrect authors, 1 failed to provide a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and 3 provided incorrect links). With the remaining 4 references, 1 was to the wrong article and the 3 remaining links were broken.

Lockwood and Castleberry concluded, “While GPT-4 demonstrated some capability in generating factually accurate information and producing APA-style citations, there were notable limitations. The substantial number of unsubstantiated claims and the presence of errors in citations and referencing indicate the need for further refinement and that we cannot blindly rely on GPT-4 to write papers.”

Some limitations should be noted. The study’s focus on a single paper may not be representative of GPT-4’s overall performance, and the use of specific prompts may have biased GPT-4’s output, suggesting that further research is needed to fully understand its capabilities.

The study, “ Examining the Capabilities of GPT-4 to Write an APA-Style School Psychology Paper ,” was authored by Adam B. Lockwood and Joshua Castleberry.